yeah ! very good idea XD!Although another year do not engage in any ic

I discussed this one with Cecco. It would have to encompass all videos made for IC-style competitions. Iron Chef used to be a standard 2 hour video, however with contests like Project Editor many people consider week long contest videos to also be Iron Chef-style videos.So for one, that would lead to a very unbalanced pool of videos to judge from with videos made in a week obviously having a leg up over those made in 2 hours. One solution would be to cut out those made in two hours, but then you'd be discriminating against the original Iron Chef-style of videos.

Another issue would be videos that were originally made for an Iron Chef-style contest and then perfected before a full release. These would be videos such as Ivy Bridge or The Nightmagi Cometh. These videos were originally made for Project Editor but then the editors withheld both projects to continue editing them for a full release. Would they be eligible for this category or not? How would tell the difference between a video that has not been edited after the original contest release and one that has?

For anyone suggesting a new category I highly suggest backing up your suggestion with reasoning and how it would be judged. It's easy to throw a category out but if the interpretation is left to someone else then it could turn into the exact opposite of what you originally intended. Go look at Fall_Child42's suggestion here: viewtopic.php?p=1473144#p1473144 That is how you do it properly ;D

That being said, I still stand by my suggestion of just dropping the custom category all together and keeping the original categories we've worked with for years. IMO, if it's this difficult to pick a category it means that we've already got enough as it is.

Something I've always wanted to see awarded was for "Best Audio Editing in an AMV".

I've seen editors slave over making an audio cut or audio effect, and can be just as much work as editing the actual video together. This includes MEPs AND regular AMVs/MMVs/FAMVs.

Naturally, AMVs without song cuts or audio effects would be banned, but this is an easy thing to see and weed out, since original songs can be found easily via YouTube. If they're untouched, it's an easy thing to find/ban.

While the videos applicable to this category would be light, they're people that deserve recognition in this regard.

CodeZTM wrote:Something I've always wanted to see awarded was for "Best Audio Editing in an AMV".

I've seen editors slave over making an audio cut or audio effect, and can be just as much work as editing the actual video together. This includes MEPs AND regular AMVs/MMVs/FAMVs.

Naturally, AMVs without song cuts or audio effects would be banned, but this is an easy thing to see and weed out, since original songs can be found easily via YouTube. If they're untouched, it's an easy thing to find/ban.

While the videos applicable to this category would be light, they're people that deserve recognition in this regard.

I like the idea behind this a lot but it might be harder to prove the ones that did it that you think. Mainly because of things like radio edits or multiple versions of the song being officially done. For example Katy Perry's Alien has a version with Kanye and a version without it and it might confuse some people who are just doing a quick YouTube check. However I definitely like giving the recognition that is deserved for audio editing so maybe for now add that as a check box under technical Details (When you enter a new video and it has "Lip Sync" and "Digital effects") and then have this category next year with that as the filter.

CodeZTM wrote:Something I've always wanted to see awarded was for "Best Audio Editing in an AMV".

I've seen editors slave over making an audio cut or audio effect, and can be just as much work as editing the actual video together. This includes MEPs AND regular AMVs/MMVs/FAMVs.

Naturally, AMVs without song cuts or audio effects would be banned, but this is an easy thing to see and weed out, since original songs can be found easily via YouTube. If they're untouched, it's an easy thing to find/ban.

While the videos applicable to this category would be light, they're people that deserve recognition in this regard.

I like the idea behind this a lot but it might be harder to prove the ones that did it that you think. Mainly because of things like radio edits or multiple versions of the song being officially done. For example Katy Perry's Alien has a version with Kanye and a version without it and it might confuse some people who are just doing a quick YouTube check. However I definitely like giving the recognition that is deserved for audio editing so maybe for now add that as a check box under technical Details (When you enter a new video and it has "Lip Sync" and "Digital effects") and then have this category next year with that as the filter.

I've suggested this category before, and that was the main reason it wasn't approved. A checkbox might not be a bad option, but would that be implementable on older entries? Or would that even be a concern if the checkbox is intended only for VCA use?

OtakuGray wrote:Sometimes anime can branch out to a younger audience and this is one of those times where you wish children would just go die.

Kitsuner wrote:I've suggested this category before, and that was the main reason it wasn't approved. A checkbox might not be a bad option, but would that be implementable on older entries? Or would that even be a concern if the checkbox is intended only for VCA use?

Theoretically it would be great to implement it for older entries but I don't think it would be possible to do that other than make every one go back for every video they ever made and check it and that just doesn't seem reasonable at all. Which is why I figured if they implemented it now then it could be used for next year.

Zanzaben wrote:Which is why I figured if they implemented it now then it could be used for next year.

If it's just a box for vca sorting, and it's not too complicated to put in place, then that would set things up nicely for next year. But is audio editing really commonplace enough to have a vca category? It would be sad if someone went to the trouble of implementing a box for us to sort by, only for the numbers to reveal that there aren't enough vids to make up a category anyway. I'm guessing most of the people who would check that box are the ones who use dubbing for parodies, where they piece together audio the same way they do footage, rather than those who edit/remix musical tracks. You could end up with a category populated by fandubs. Most fandubs already fit nicely in the 'humor' category, so there's no point giving them an 'edited audio' category as well.

If it were a score category like sfx (video) then they'd have to edit the op setup to reflect the new score, which would probably have to wait for the org redesign, and would be a low priority even then. In that case it won't matter that old vids don't have it marked because choosing sfx/lip sync has always been voluntary - checking an audio editing box would be the same. Those who hear about the new option and care will go through and check it for their old vids, the rest will just have that option N/A like many old vids do for sfx.